The fact that it's not a marriage, a marriage constitutes a male and female that can produce a child. When has a male and male produced a child?

Some plain common sense. Just another example of western society on the mental and moral decline.

After all there are people who aplaud this as a great way for 'population control'

And whether it's a dildo or a finger doing the action, it's all the same.

Women with two holes doing each other or men with two sticks doing each other in the wrong holes.

No matter which way you spin it, it's an action, no one is born doing this just as no one is born a killer, or a thief, or a rapist, etc... people are shaped into these things. On the other hand male and female gender exist for a reason.

It's a mental sickness that has lead people to accept this mental sickness of homosexuality.

i will never, ever ever in my life understand why anybody gives a hot fuck about what other consenting adults do in the bedroom

No matter which way you spin it, it's an action, no one is born doing this just as no one is born a killer, or a thief, or a rapist, etc... people are shaped into these things. On the other hand male and female gender exist for a reason.

And in the case of infertility of a heterosexual couple or one using contraceptives, ...no one is born of those couplings either. Or are you of the school of thought that says sex is for procreation only?

Quote

It's a mental sickness that has lead people to accept this mental sickness of homosexuality.

If it is a mental sickness that has led to my acceptance of homosexuals, then guilty as charged.

In a world gone mad and rampant with mental illness, I prefer to have a mental illness that is tolerant & accepting of human being who simply want to express their love for each other, than succumb to the mental illness of intolerant bigotry and discrimination against human beings who are simply different.

How on earth can I fault a MAN for being attracted to the same thing that I am attracted to?That in itself is the height of hypocrisy. That's like YOU saying their are certain things and qualities about your wife that you find / found appealing, ...but Ellen Degeneres is not allowed to find those very same things / qualities appealing? Gimme a break! If I prefer my partner / companion to be strong & manly, I can't fault someone for prefering that as well.

Not choosing sides, but the etymology above is a bit forced, if not contentious. 'Desire' is a Romantic term, since it derives from the Romans via Latin. 'Desire' conveys the sense of a volitional wish:

from the Online Etymological Dictionary: desire (v.) early 13c., from O.Fr. desirrer (12c.) "wish, desire, long for," from L. desiderare "long for, wish for; demand, expect," original sense perhaps "await what the stars will bring," from the phrase de sidere "from the stars," from sidus (gen. sideris) "heavenly body, star, constellation" [as in, wishing on a star] (but see consider). Related: Desired; desiring. The noun is attested from c.1300, from O.Fr. desir, from desirer; sense of "lust" is first recorded mid-14c.

The Greek sense of 'desire' is more complicated (it's tied to erotic love, i.e., the objectification of what one wishes to possess), but I believe the term you have in mind is 'thelo,' i.e., "to desire, to will, to wish."

Although 'thelo' is referenced in theological studies of Biblical Greek, any subsequent connection or application of 'desire' to the Father or the Lord, as in the case of the Will of God (to make manifest what He desires), might well be an example of eisegesis. If our understanding of 'desire' appeals to its Western etymology, we have to note that the ancient Greeks and Romans were not Christians, and that the sense of the term was tweaked to suit medieval meditations of theological problems (as well as modern appropriations and distortions, whether Liberal, Progressive, Conservative, or what have you).

shhh.... perhaps, ...but stop making me have to use a dictionary to figure out what you're saying.

The fact that it's not a marriage, a marriage constitutes a male and female that can produce a child. When has a male and male produced a child?

Actually, the concept of marriage originally had nothing to do with romantic love but was merely contractural in nature. A way to establish ownership & inheritance rights. It was a merging of wealth between families, nothing more, ...nothing less. This clear cut definition of contractural obligations & rights is something not enjoyed by all. What you propose is simply legislated discrimination plain & simple, ...and that is WRONG!

And in the case of infertility of a heterosexual couple or one using contraceptives, ...no one is born of those couplings either. Or are you of the school of thought that says sex is for procreation only?

Yes we can use our knowledge of science to fix what is not working in an actual male and a female.

On the other hand using a 'donor' of ANOTHER woman and using that woman as a 'surrogate mother' still does not change the fact that a male and male will NEVER produce a child.

No matter how you look at it, what you are doing is FORCING this. They want to fuck each other's holes period and they want justification for it, tax deductions, etc...

If a man gets 'srs' sexual reassignment surgery and gets his dick chopped off and takes all the estrogens and anti testosterones, and all the sexy makeup to make themselves look like a woman, they will still be a farce, they will never be a woman because they are BORN A MAN and THEY ARE A MAN. The end.

They will never grow a uterus because they are a male.

Quote

If it is a mental sickness that has led to my acceptance of homosexuals, then guilty as charged.

In a world gone mad and rampant with mental illness, I prefer to have a mental illness that is tolerant & accepting of human being who simply want to express their love for each other, than succumb to the mental illness of intolerant bigotry and discrimination against human beings who are simply different.

How on earth can I fault a MAN for being attracted to the same thing that I am attracted to?That in itself is the height of hypocrisy. That's like YOU saying their are certain things and qualities about your wife that you find / found appealing, ...but Ellen Degeneres is not allowed to find those very same things / qualities appealing? Gimme a break! If I prefer my partner / companion to be strong & manly, I can't fault someone for prefering that as well.

Oh come on now. "Discrimination". Because they cry a river over their act and have militarized and mobilized themselves in politics to push for homosexuality in public life?

There's a difference in discrimination of say race, what you are, and what you DO such as an act be it theft, homosexuality, corruption, cheating, etc... These are ACTS that you CHOOSE.

They are being discriminated for their action not for who they are and rightly so. It is a demented action and it is only OKAY because western society has endorsed man made laws that make it so even if it goes against common sense.

The same arguments some day could be used for beastiality, necrophilia and all other sorts of perverse desires some humans can develop.

It degenerates to philospohical debate but does not change the facts that it is indeed misguided perversion. A living man and a living woman are the only ones capable of forming a healthy family and producing children that won't be confused when they grow up saying wait you guys used another woman to give birth to me but you are both men? Big wtf.

Just for a moment think of what impact it'll have on a child seeing two men kissing and fondling each other? Or two women kissing and fondling each other? You think for a moment it will not have an effect on the child?

And just to add one more thing, the so called arguments of 'born this way' is bs as part of gay propaganda is also saying this is a 'life style choice'. A contradiction. It is a CHOSEN act.

The whole 'born gay' is the same bs as believing in God or disbelieving in God is in our dna. How is it that atheists then become believers or vice versa? It is the same guy (I forget his name) who came up with these claims of it being in dna hence 'born this way'.

Imagine then, that people are literally 'born' criminals, or 'born' thieves, or 'born' killers, therefore it's justifable because they were oh.. born this way. No one is BORN into these things, they are RAISED, developed, shaped into these things.

If you ask most transgender people about their 'journey' you will find out most of them started crossdressing from a young age, secretly or even encouraged by their care takers (parents, grandparents, whoevers).

In contrast to crossdressers of the past who kept it 'in the closet' now there are venues where they take it a step further with parades, get togethers, the internet, etc... Society ENCOURAGES it, so it further shapes these people.

Even television, media, movies, almost every tv series now a days HAS to have a gay in it. Movies have normalized the act/behaviours through commedy movies making it 'funny' and 'enjoyable', hence acceptable through humor.

Hence this whole pro-gay epidemic is an invested effort of the past two three decades of subliminal programming, propaganda and political endorsment.

The original DSM (manual of psychiatry) indeed dubbed it a mental disease but for political reasons it was REMOVED and renamed as a 'life style choice'. Yet alot of people WERE 'cured' from it by psychiatrists, but no one talks about that.

Just for a moment think of what impact it'll have on a child seeing two men kissing and fondling each other? Or two women kissing and fondling each other? You think for a moment it will not have an effect on the child?

I'd rather not thankyouverymuch. And while I'm at it, I will say that I don't think it is appropriate for a child to be seeing a heterosexual couple kissing & fondling each other either. Sexual acts between adults should remain between adults, ...and behind closed doors. Children should have nothing to do with it.

By your line of reasoning a healthy heterosexual couple who chooses never to have children should not be allowed to marry because they too will not reproduce. It is pure nonsense.

Ahmed, you have your prejudices towards homosexuality. That is clear.I have my own feeling & thoughts on the issue. I am not going to get you to change your mind on this, ...and you sure as heck will not be changing mine. The best we can say is we agree to disagree. I don't think any further discussion on the subject is merited.

I'd rather not thankyouverymuch. And while I'm at it, I will say that I don't think it is appropriate for a child to be seeing a heterosexual couple kissing & fondling each other either. Sexual acts between adults should remain between adults, ...and behind closed doors. Children should have nothing to do with it.

Oh come on now, your parents never hugged, kissed in front of you? Please... I wasn't saying 'fuck in front of them'.

Quote

By your line of reasoning a healthy heterosexual couple who chooses never to have children should not be allowed to marry because they too will not reproduce. It is pure nonsense.

lol, nope that's maybe your understanding and line of thought.

My wife and I cannot have children but I will not use another 'surrogate' woman or donor to have a child. I still remain with my wife. However it is incomparable. I am with a WOMAN as meant to be. God created man and woman. Not fag and fag.

I am avoiding turning it into religious discussion but most religious scripts frown upon homosexuality as an ill of society just as theft, murder, etc... it is an action, a chosen act, performed by the will of a person. As far as abrahamic religions go Sodom and Gomorah was destroyed by God for this very act they were famous for. It's not like it's something new. We are not progressing in western society but regressing.

On the other hand even if you look at it from an atheistic evolutionary argument, humanity would seize to exist. If you jam packed all gay guys on an island they would die off. The end.

It is therefore a forced ACT, hence perverse desires being forced to be allowed and permitted in society by man made laws.

Oh come on now, your parents never hugged, kissed in front of you? Please... I wasn't saying 'fuck in front of them'.

lol, nope that's maybe your understanding and line of thought.

My wife and I cannot have children but I will not use another 'surrogate' woman or donor to have a child. I still remain with my wife. However it is incomparable. I am with a WOMAN as meant to be. God created man and woman. Not fag and fag.

I am avoiding turning it into religious discussion but most religious scripts frown upon homosexuality as an ill of society just as theft, murder, etc... it is an action, a chosen act, performed by the will of a person. As far as abrahamic religions go Sodom and Gomorah was destroyed by God for this very act.

On the other hand even if you look at it from an atheistic evolutionary argument, humanity would seize to exist. If you jam packed all gay guys on an island they would die off. The end.

It is therefore a forced ACT, hence perverse desires being forced to be allowed and permitted in society by man made laws.

Like I said, ...we have our positions. I will respect your right to whatever conclusion you come to, ...regardless of how assinine, or bigoted it is. You will not persuade me to your reasoning, so let's simply choose to respect each other's right to our own opinions, and agree to disagree.

Ahmed, you have your prejudices towards homosexuality. That is clear.I have my own feeling & thoughts on the issue. I am not going to get you to change your mind on this, ...and you sure as heck will not be changing mine. The best we can say is we agree to disagree. I don't think any further discussion on the subject is merited.

I am using intellect and not having 'prejudice' but rational facts. I have been surrounded by gays, transgenders, etc... at college and I used to debate their 'arguments' for why they do what they do in many of the social and political classes.

It boils down to them heading head first through the wall in wanting to do this and wanting to do it period. It has nothing to do with being born that way or this way. They are born a man, or they are born a woman. They want the whole world to accept their action, that's all it is.

No one is born with the desire for the same gender. It goes against our programming and forget religion, goes against science if you simply look at it from a procreative perspective.

Since we have God given intellect, we can do pretty retarded things or we can do pretty smart things but it is OUR choices. They happen to make pretty retarded choices, based on their desires and nothing else.

They are just heading head first through the wall hard with their desire to this act and have mobilized to endorse it.

It is no different than certain groups of people mobilizing to do a certain act such as war, weapons of mass destruction, iraq, etc... and no matter how stupid, how demented, how full of lies and deception it is, they keep heading head first through the wall to do it and they will do it.

I am using intellect and not having 'prejudice' but rational facts. I have been surrounded by gays, transgenders, etc... at college and I used to debate their 'arguments' for why they do what they do in many of the social and political classes.

It boils down to them heading head first through the wall in wanting to do this and wanting to do it period. It has nothing to do with being born that way or this way. They are born a man, or they are born a woman. They want the whole world to accept their action, that's all it is.

You're really beginning to annoy me.

Did you know you're displaying some classical sign of mental illness yourself?

Did you know you're displaying some classical sign of mental illness yourself?

So that's your argument because I reject the act/action of homosexuality

Maybe if homosexuals are 'born this way' they shouldn't have testicles either. Why produce sperm?

The bottom line is, homosexuality is something that is being forced up on society. You have fallen victim to the decades of subliminal programming, propaganda, and political activism of homosexual groups. In the UK a priest was jailed and fined for saying homosexuality is a sin. Ironically he had to go to the european court of human rights.

So that's your argument because I reject the act/action of homosexuality

No that is not my argument. You don't seem to understand, ...I have stopped arguing.

You've made your point, and stated your beliefs. I have stated mine.

Any further attempts to re-state your position, do not serve to convince me, or sway me to your position. They simply serve to annoy, and are made in vain. THAT is why I'm finding you to be annoying (on THIS particular subject)